Could Horford end up being the worst contract of offseason?

[Fierce1]

If your only ideas as a basketball fan are the following three you're going to suffer a lot more heartache than necessary:

1. How tall a lineup is determines its success
2. Only championship seasons are successful seasons
3. Only championships matter in player evaluation

The first one is going to break your brain as the NBA continues to evolve. The second two are going to rob you of a lot of joy.

History tells us that the Celts always won a championship when their bigs are elite.

Last time Celts were in the Finals was 10 years ago.

This is also the second decade where the Celts failed to win a single championship.
The first one was the 1990s.

Having a higher standard doesn't mean it will result in heartache.

[celticsclay]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

[RPGenerate]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

Wasn't there a Sixers fan on here bragging about the signing at the start of the season? Where did he go? lol. It was such a bad contract from the start, which makes all the cocky Sixers fans horrible takes even funnier.

[Fierce1]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

[Adelaide Celt]

What I'd love to see is for someone to describe the Horford criticism as 'strange'. Don't suppose I ever will though...

[RockinRyA]

If your only ideas as a basketball fan are the following three you're going to suffer a lot more heartache than necessary:

1. How tall a lineup is determines its success
2. Only championship seasons are successful seasons
3. Only championships matter in player evaluation

The first one is going to break your brain as the NBA continues to evolve. The second two are going to rob you of a lot of joy.

History tells us that the Celts always won a championship when their bigs are elite.

Last time Celts were in the Finals was 10 years ago.

This is also the second decade where the Celts failed to win a single championship.
The first one was the 1990s.

Having a higher standard doesn't mean it will result in heartache.

Its an entirely different era. The game is even vastly different from 2008, let alone the 60s-80s. Its also a different league, different rules with more teams. This isnt a league of 10 teams anymore. Its very hard to win a championship these days, let alone multiple. And you know what's funny? The last team to win multiple championships is a team that did the opposite of what you are preaching. So you can wish all you want, hijack every single thread like usual. Ignore every argument, believe in the moves of guys like Divac, there's no way WCS, Noel, Drummond and Poetl will be targeted by Ainge. 

[RockinRyA]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

[Fierce1]

If your only ideas as a basketball fan are the following three you're going to suffer a lot more heartache than necessary:

1. How tall a lineup is determines its success
2. Only championship seasons are successful seasons
3. Only championships matter in player evaluation

The first one is going to break your brain as the NBA continues to evolve. The second two are going to rob you of a lot of joy.

History tells us that the Celts always won a championship when their bigs are elite.

Last time Celts were in the Finals was 10 years ago.

This is also the second decade where the Celts failed to win a single championship.
The first one was the 1990s.

Having a higher standard doesn't mean it will result in heartache.

Its an entirely different era. The game is even vastly different from 2008, let alone the 60s-80s. Its also a different league, different rules with more teams. This isnt a league of 10 teams anymore. Its very hard to win a championship these days, let alone multiple. And you know what's funny? The last team to win multiple championships is a team that did the opposite of what you are preaching. So you can wish all you want, hijack every single thread like usual. Ignore every argument, believe in the moves of guys like Divac, there's no way WCS, Noel, Drummond and Poetl will be targeted by Ainge. 

There's always an exception and GSW was it.

Klay and Steph are 2 of the best shooters in NBA history.
That's why their small ball worked.

Like I said, I hope you're man enough to admit that you were wrong if the Celts exit in the playoffs this season.

All you do is instigate and run away when the mods come.

Let's just wait and see in a couple of months if small ball returns to the Finals or it will be two big teams fighting for the championship in June.

[Fierce1]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

No, the difference is I'm only criticizing, you are claiming to be better than the GMs of the NBA.

There's a big difference between criticizing and claiming to be better than NBA GMs.

Seriously, what are your credentials?

Have you even played basketball in high school or college?

If your experience of basketball only comes from watching the NBA then it's not surprising that you think big men are not important in the sport of basketball.

Even the small ball of GSW had Bogut then Pachulia, both 7-footers.

[dannyboy35]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

No, the difference is I'm only criticizing, you are claiming to be better than the GMs of the NBA.

There's a big difference between criticizing and claiming to be better than NBA GMs.

Seriously, what are your credentials?

Have you even played basketball in high school or college?

If your experience of basketball only comes from watching the NBA then it's not surprising that you think big men are not important in the sport of basketball.

Even the small ball of GSW had Bogut then Pachulia, both 7-footers.

  “What are your credentials?” Why don’t you start comparing SAT scores? Gimme a break.

[Fierce1]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

No, the difference is I'm only criticizing, you are claiming to be better than the GMs of the NBA.

There's a big difference between criticizing and claiming to be better than NBA GMs.

Seriously, what are your credentials?

Have you even played basketball in high school or college?

If your experience of basketball only comes from watching the NBA then it's not surprising that you think big men are not important in the sport of basketball.

Even the small ball of GSW had Bogut then Pachulia, both 7-footers.

  “What are your credentials?” Why don’t you start comparing SAT scores? Gimme a break.

He's claiming to be better than the NBA GMs.

That's why I'm asking for credentials.

Who knows, maybe RockinRya is Pat Riley in real life.

[Donoghus]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

No, the difference is I'm only criticizing, you are claiming to be better than the GMs of the NBA.

There's a big difference between criticizing and claiming to be better than NBA GMs.

Seriously, what are your credentials?

Have you even played basketball in high school or college?

If your experience of basketball only comes from watching the NBA then it's not surprising that you think big men are not important in the sport of basketball.

Even the small ball of GSW had Bogut then Pachulia, both 7-footers.

  “What are your credentials?” Why don’t you start comparing SAT scores? Gimme a break.

He's claiming to be better than the NBA GMs.

That's why I'm asking for credentials.

Who knows, maybe RockinRya is Pat Riley in real life.

And what exactly are your credentials?

I'm also failing to see where RockinRya claimed he was better than NBA GMs.

[Fierce1]

Related to your comments that he is having a "top 50 impact to winning" how would you think the best way to demonstrate that is? For example you say he has more of an impact than Simmons despite al have 3.7 win shares and Ben Simmons having 6.7 despite playing on the same team and Harris is at 4.3

WS are based largely on counting stats.  Horford has poor counting stats.  But as I said, they Sixers are 11-6 in games with Horford without Embiid.  Last year, and every other year of Embiid's career, the Sixers have been a well below .500 team without Embiid on the court.  That isn't the case this year. 

As for actual metrics, you can look at on/off numbers and see that the Sixers are actually worse with Simmons on the court than when he is not on the court (-1.4 per 100 possessions).  Per 100 possessions, Harris is at +3 and Horford at +2.3, but when you realize that Horford is often in the game when Embiid is not, I think you can reasonably conclude that Horford impacts winning more than Harris.  Just looking at Embiid, I think illustrates that.  Every year of his career, before this one, Embiid was at least +10 per 100 possessions in the on/off numbers.  This year he is down to +3.4.  I believe a large reason for that is Horford, who quite simply is a better player by a wide margin to Embiid's prior back-up centers.

If you look at counting stats, you will never really see Horford's value, but he has always had a great impact to winning.  It is one of the reasons why every single team he has ever played on has made the playoffs (I'm not sure there are many players in league history with 12+ year careers that can say that).  Average Al's impact is much greater than the box score counting stats and always has been.

Your new argument is really that Horford has a greater impact on winning than Ben Simmons? I can tell you if Ben Simmons is injured and there are no other changes their betting line will move 2 to 2.5 points. If Horford is injured and not playing it does not move at all or perhaps .( points.

In a game with Simmons out tonight and Embid leaving at the end of the first, Horford had a chance to show how much he contributes to winning. He goes for a team worst -15 in 34 minutes in a really disappointing loss to the cavs. Serious question, are the takes defending Horford's contract on this thread consistently for 20 pages (including the really cringe inducing early season bumps) the worst takes on anything this entire season? I am having a hard time imaging Horford back in Philly next season. I could even see him retiring before the end of his contract at this rate. It has been brutal.

So true.

I truly believe that Horford was on the decline when the Celts signed him in 2016.

But it's not really surprising considering the Sixers also thought Fultz was a great pick with the #1 pick.

The Sixers and their front office are not doing a good job, that's for sure.

Wow what a hypocrite. Weren't you just telling me off for criticizing the drafting of guys like Divac and McDonough? Now you get to criticize the Sixers?

No, the difference is I'm only criticizing, you are claiming to be better than the GMs of the NBA.

There's a big difference between criticizing and claiming to be better than NBA GMs.

Seriously, what are your credentials?

Have you even played basketball in high school or college?

If your experience of basketball only comes from watching the NBA then it's not surprising that you think big men are not important in the sport of basketball.

Even the small ball of GSW had Bogut then Pachulia, both 7-footers.

  “What are your credentials?” Why don’t you start comparing SAT scores? Gimme a break.

He's claiming to be better than the NBA GMs.

That's why I'm asking for credentials.

Who knows, maybe RockinRya is Pat Riley in real life.

And what exactly are your credentials?

I'm also failing to see where RockinRya claimed he was better than NBA GMs.

Check reply #440 on this thread.

You can see that I was talking to Fafnir and out of the blue, RockinRya comes in and hijacks the conversation.

Ever since the trade deadline passed, I stopped talking about trading for big men.
But Rockin seems to think it's fun bringing back the stuff that I said before the trade deadline.
You don't think he's an instigator?

And you're going to accuse me of being a hijacker?

Again, reply #440, please check.

[Monkhouse]

Just saying, it does certainly take two to tango... You're also firing back shots, so it's not like you can assume to play the role of victim here.

I know RockinRyA isn't playing nice either, but you've been pushing this Drummond-makes-our-Celtics-a-contender drum for quite a while now..

That being said, maybe you both should just leave each other alone or stop replying to him for now.

__

Getting back on topic..

I'm not going to lie. I miss Al Horford, but most of all..

I miss Anna Horford... 

EDIT: Dang, I didn't know she was that tall.

[celticsclay]

What I'd love to see is for someone to describe the Horford criticism as 'strange'. Don't suppose I ever will though...

Can we imagine if Ray Allen going to Miami had worked out this bad?